asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether, during his current review of the planning machinery set up in the Town and Country Planning Act, 1962, he will consider the proposal that parish councils should have, as of right, a copy of all planning applications that affect them.

My right hon. Friend has considered this proposal, but he thinks it better to encourage voluntary arrangements for consultation with parish councils.

Is the Minister of State aware that quite unnecessary friction and delay occur through the failure of planning authorities to inform parish councils about these matters? Will he give every thought to the possibilty of statutory requirements making it necessary for parish councils to be kept fully informed?

As far as I am aware, the voluntary arrangements are working well. If the hon. Gentleman cares to call my attention to cases where he thinks that they are not working effectively, certainly I will look at them.

How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile the desire of the Government that individual neighbours should be informed with his answer that he does not require parishes to be informed?

The voluntary arrangements are working well, and I think it is better left to voluntary arrangement. It is difficult to provide standardised procedures to meet the needs of all counties. I think that it is better to rely upon this, if it works.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what advice he has given to local authorities about the damage to wild life caused by the indiscriminate and careless use of modern hedge-cutting machines and weed killers on road verges; and if he will encourage the setting up by county councils of countryside sub-committees of county planning committees, with access to scientific advice, as in East Sussex.

My right hon. Friend believes local authorities are well aware of the objections to these processes, but he considers the setting up of countryside sub-committees to be a question of management best decided by the county councils themselves. Full access to scientific advice need not depend on this particular arrangement.

Is the Minister of State aware that the attitude of councils varies from the enlightened to the extremely callous, as must be apparent to a great many people travelling round the countryside? Does he not feel that there is a clear case for persuading local authorities concerned with road verges to keep in touch with the Nature Conservancy and with voluntary organisations like the county naturalist trusts?

I agree that the Nature Conservancy has served very usefully in helping local authorities with scientific advice, and we shall encourage that.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will take steps, by legislation or otherwise, to disqualify contractors, estate agents or any persons who have financial dealings with local authorities, from membership of such bodies.

No, Sir. There are already statutory provisions to ensure that the financial interests of elected members do not conflict with their public duties.

How does my hon. Friend square that with the answer he gave on 25th April concerning the civic rights of teachers?

There is a lot of difference between being in permanent and continuous employment of a local authority and having an occasional contract with one.

Will my hon. Friend reconsider the whole question? Is he aware that in my constituency there is a great deal of public anxiety about the sale of certain parts of Hornchurch Airfield? I am not suggesting that there is corruption, but will my hon. Friend look into the question of introducing legislation in regard to estate agents?

My right hon. Friend's tendency, as was the Maud Committee's, is not to increase the number of pecuniary interest tests but to make the legislation a little more sensible.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what is the estimated total cost to local government and industry, respectively, of implementing existing legislation about the pollution of rivers and estuaries.

I do not think that it would be practicable to make any estimate. The maintenance or restoration of the wholesomeness of our rivers is a continuous process. Future changes in the volume and complexity of the waste waters to be treated cannot now be predicted accurately.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the high standard demanded by river authorities is putting a very severe strain on industry, and also now on local authorities who receive no Government grant for this purpose? Would not it be wise to phase this necessary legislation over a period of years so that the financial burden is not as acute as it is today?

As Lancashire Members my right hon. Friend and I know a thing or two about polluted rivers, and I do not think that we would want to do anything to discourage river authorities from getting on with this work.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will receive a deputation from Macclesfield concerning the proposal to erect new gasholders there.

My right hon. Friend has called in for decision by himself an application by the North Western Gas Board for planning permission to erect gasholders and buildings at Paradise Farm, Macclesfield. A public local inquiry at which interested parties will be able to state their case is being arranged and it would therefore be improper for him to receive a deputation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a few weeks ago his hon. Friend—one of the UnderSecretaries—gave an undertaking that he would visit Macclesfield to look at the site? Is he further aware that the proposal to erect two gasometers, 135 feet in diameter, in the most beautiful country in the Pennines is sacrilege? Will he protect the interests of local residents?

As this is to be the subject of a local inquiry and my right hon. Friend will be exercising an appellate jurisdiction, the hon. Member will not expect me to comment upon what he has said.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government by what amount he intends to revise the projected expenditure of £4,392 million by local authorities in 1969–70, at 1965 Survey Prices, in account of the underfulfilment of the National Plan; if he will specify the services affected by the revision; and if he will make a statement.

I would refer the hon. Member to what my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said in his Budget statement.

On this subject, that was remarkably uncommunicative. Does the right hon. Gentleman expect that figure to be revised as a result of the Chancellor's statement? As soon as the revision is fulfilled, will he undertake to report to the House in the detailed manner requested in the Question?

I am not sure that it is possible to be more communicative to the hon. Gentleman, because no one is clear what his Question requests. It refers to figures on both current and capital account, to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and the responsibility of many other departmental Ministers. I can go no further than my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary did in reply to the hon. Gentleman on 13th June.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he is aware of the hazards to health and the damage to amenities caused by the Homefire Plant at Keresley, Coventry; and if he will ensure that the process of making smokeless fuel in the interests of health and aesthetics should not itself result in fouling of the atmosphere.

I much regret the conditions caused by this plant at present, and I am concerned that every effort should be made to improve them in the interests of health and amenity. I understand that smoke emission from an incinerator has been much reduced and is expected to improve further shortly. The need to minimise air pollution was in mind when the plant was planned and the alkali inspectorate will seek to ensure, in co-operation with the National Coal Board, that this aim is realised.

While appreciating my hon. Friend's efforts, is it not absurd that a plant designed to eliminate smoke should cover the neighbourhood with a pall of black, soggy fall-out? Will my hon. Friend act more energetically to avoid this extraordinary paradox?

To my hon. Friend's credit, he has been active on behalf of his constituents. I understand that there will be a further reduction in smoke emission in three months and that the new arrestment plant which is being installed will ensure that it runs properly. I can only apologise on behalf of those who operate the plant; I am not here to defend it.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will seek to amend the law so that those garages rateably occupied by householders and used in connection with their occupation of a nearby dwelling may be entitled to the 5d. rate deduction given to householders under Section 48(1) of the General Rate Act, 1967.

No, Sir. The purpose of the present provision is to reduce the rate burden on householders in respect of their dwellings and garages only benefit incidentally as parts of dwellings. While I understand the annoyance of some ratepayers, the amount involved is normally very small and any alteration would still leave anomalies.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the sense of unfairness between occupiers of houses, who are entitled to this deduction, and those of flats, who are not? Will he consider this again?

Most people would feel a sense of unfairness that they never had any rebate before on domestic payments. I think that most ratepayers recognise the generous nature of the Government's provision.

Is it not curious that if a garage is part of the structure of the house it gets relief but that if it belongs to the owner of a flat and is a few yards away it does not? Does the hon. Gentleman really defend that?

It is not for me but for the courts to defend it. The question of whether or not a garage is separately rated must be settled by the courts, and any ratepayer is entitled to test it in the courts.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he will take to ensure that caravan site operators pass on to the residents the saving in rates they have realised as a result of individual rating of caravans.

My right hon. Friend would certainly expect site operators in these circumstances to adjust their pitch rents, but he is not yet satisfied that special steps to compel them to do so are needed.

What information has the hon. Gentleman about the practice of site operators in this respect? Does he not consider it grossly unfair that those residents who have been levied as to two years' back rates are entitled to claim rebates only from April last year, and will he introduce legislation to remove the anomaly?

My right hon. Friend is looking at the problem, but the difficulty is that there are many other people to whom this may happen and not just those in caravans. But as regards refunds of rates, I imagine that site operators are very much aware that the eyes of the hon. Gentleman and other are on them at the moment and will think this is the sensible thing to do.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what progress he is making with his review of present legislation relating to the position of statutory undertakings in regard to planning and compensation; and whether he will make a statement.

Consultations are proceeding with the other Departments concerned in setting on foot an investigation of the position of the statutory undertakers under planning; and I am to meet the local authority associations and the Greater London Council early next month.

Does not the Minister consider that the Abingdon dispute demonstrated how urgent it is to have a review, and to continue his personal investigation and intervention to solve this problem by peaceful means?

I am very much aware of the hon. Member's concern about this matter. The discussions will be held early next month, and in the light of those discussions we shall consider what action we should take.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now introduce legislation to extend the protection of the Rent Act to caravan dwellers, in view of the report of the Consumer Council entitled "Living in a Caravan."

My right hon. Friend has studied the comments so far made on the report and has asked the local authority associations for their views. He will then be able to decide how best to deal with the problems of caravan dwellers.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the report underlines what many of us have been saying to him for some time, and that it is quite wrong that a small number of site owners should be able to behave like petty dictators? Will he take action as soon as possible to deal with the situation.

As my hon. Friend says, the report indicates that this involves a very small number of site owners. I think the report also shows the complexity of the problem. It is not a simple one to solve.

Do the Government accept as a matter of policy that a caravan can be a good permanent home, provided that there is adequate supervision and proper site arrangements?

Yes.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now seek powers to set up a housing development authority able to acquire land from the Land Commission and to hand out building contracts in order to stimulate house building wherever this is required.

No, Sir. My right hon. Friend is well satisfied that local authorities can build the houses needed in the public sector and that building for owner occupation is equally going well.

But does not my hon. Friend accept that some local authorities are not building as they ought to build, and does not he agree that part of the difficulty with the housing programme and with the supply of materials necessary for it is the fact that there is instability in the demand? Will he look at this again? I sent him a long memorandum and I was dissatisfied with his reply.

It may be that some local authorities are not doing as well as they could, but the Question is concerned with the setting up of a housing development authority to take over this work. With respect, I think that by the time it was set up and we got it organised, and it took over the land, we could have built a lot of houses.

rose—

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, it is my intention to raise this on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

The hon. Lady should note that she has cut out a supplementary question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is satisfied that rents registered in 1966 under the Rent Act are actually ½ per cent. higher than previous rents; how he explains this failure to take the shortage factor sufficiently into consideration when fixing rents; to what extent rents registered recently are higher than those for similar dwellings determined in the early operation of the Act; and if he will make a statement on the changes he proposes.

The figure of ½ per cent. is the overall average of a roughly equal number of reductions and increases and does not in my view show how any particular rent has been reduced because of scarcity value. Rents registered recently are in general no higher than the early registrations for comparable groups of dwellings. On the last part of the Question, I would refer my hon. Friend to my reply to the hon. Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. Rose) on 6th June.—[Vol. 747, c. 168.]

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the intention of the 1965 Rent Act was to right the injustice of the exhorbitant rents which were encouraged by the Tory Rent Act? Will he bring this to the attention of those members of the rent assessment committees who are ignoring it?

My hon. Friend is quite right in saying that the intention was to remedy injustices. I am sure he will like to know that the evidence is that in London, for all houses with a gross value of less than £125, the average registered rents are lower than the rents previously paid. The same is true for flats and rooms.

Is it not the case that a body of precedents is emerging, as was hoped, on which the assessment committees can decide how they judge scarcity, and that they are doing their work very efficiently?

I think that they are doing their work very efficiently. My right hon. Friend is most anxious that more tenants should take advantage of their services.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement on the results of his national survey of older houses; and what steps he intends to take to improve them, particularly by installing baths, hot water systems and inside water closets.

My right hon. Friend hopes to publish provisional results of the sample survey very shortly.

Will my hon. Friend, in his proposals, consider asking local authorities to make far wider use of their powers to improve whole neighbourhoods, as this is probably the best way to get it done, by compulsory methods where needed?

My right hon. Friend is at the moment considering new proposals in the comprehensive review that we are having, and I shall take into account what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what progress has been made in arranging to provide surveyor's assistance for tenants who appear before the rent assessment committees.

As I mentioned in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mr. Blenkinsop) on 6th June, my right hon. Friend is considering this question with the professional bodies concerned, and he is also considering whether some general guidance might be given to help those presenting their case before a committee.—[Vol. 747, c. 167.]

For some time my hon. Friend has spoken about helping tenants. Is he aware that in some areas landlords and property companies have so organised themselves that they are willing to fight every decision when the rent officer reduces the rent?

I hope that tenants will also organise themselves and be prepared to take action in the same way.

Will my hon. Friend treat this as a matter of extreme urgency? Is he aware that tenants who appear unrepresented before rent assessment committees are placed at a grave disadvantage vis-à-vis] landlords, who often have the highest quality technical assistance?

I know that most of the presidents of panels agree with my hon. Friend that it would be a great help to them if there were representation for tenants, and we are getting on with our discussions with the bodies concerned.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that there will be widespread support for any action that he takes on this matter? Is he aware that there is great anxiety at the slowness in dealing with this? Will he introduce some legal aid or surveyor aid scheme for this?

Under the 1957 Rent Act?

I was discussing this only three hours ago. We are getting on with it.

May we have a definite date when we shall receive a reply in view of my hon. Friend's earlier replies to questions which I have asked on this subject?

I do not think that it would be wise to give a firm date, but as soon as we have something definite we will put it forward.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government, in view of the fact that some local authorities intend to sell large numbers of council houses, thus reducing the chances of those on the waiting lists being housed, if he will now introduce legislation to define the limits of local authority action with regard to the sale of council housing.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will seek powers to ensure that no local housing authority can sell any units of rented accommodation until he has satisfied himself that the sale would not adversely affect the position of families on the waiting list for rehousing.

Adequate powers already exist to control the sale of council houses. I have recently advised local authorities on policy on this question, including advice that they should not sell existing houses in areas where there is still an unsatisfied demand for houses to let at moderate rents.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that thousands of people on waiting lists would welcome Government intervention? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is important for the Government to make it clear that they will not have social advance held up by Tories temporarily in control at the town hall or county hall?

I think that I have made my position perfectly clear on this. I deprecate the sale of council houses if the sale of them affects the waiting lists and reduces the stock of available houses.

Will the Minister give an assurance that if a council is satisfied that there is a legitimate demand for council houses to be purchased, he will not thwart the electoral will by financial control?

I can understand the right hon. and learned Gentleman's anxiety about this in view of the fact that the sale of council houses in Birmingham is now falling substantially, but we shall certainly keep the whole question of general consent under review. I think the House would like to remember that I can withdraw or modify the general consent at any time, and I shall watch the situation very carefully.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that while the sale of council houses may have a short-term benefit on the housing revenue account, it is bound to have a long-term detrimental effect? Will he, instead of advising local authorities, where he thinks it necessary remove subsidies if he feel that councils have enough houses to sell?

I think that the economic consequence might be as my hon. Friend says, and I think it might be worth while potential purchasers considering the economic advantages or disadvantages of making these purchases.

Is the Minister aware that thousands of people wish to buy these houses? Will he give every encouragement to people to become their own house owners, and provide Government money to councils for their own purposes?

I take the view that houses for sale are a matter for private enterprise. There are equally thousands of people on waiting lists who are waiting for houses to rent.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce legislation to provide financial support to the work of the National House Builders Registration Council and requiring building societies and local authorities to grant mortgages for new houses only on properties constructed by National House Builders Registration Council registered builders.

I do not think that the work of the Council, which is expanding rapidly, is being hampered by lack of finance, and I know that the Council attaches importance to the self-supporting character of its scheme of protection for house purchasers. The Building Societies' Association has recommended member societies to grant mortgages for new houses only on properties built by registered builders, and a similar recommendation was made to local authorities by my right hon. Friend's predecessor. He would like to see how these voluntary arrangements work out before considering the need for legislation.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the N.H.B.R.C. at the moment offers a fair measure of protection to private house buyers, but that if Government assistance were given it could increase the amount of inspection it now undertakes, which would benefit millions of prospective buyers?

We are in close touch with the N.H.B.R.C. What my hon. Friend says is not the view that it has expressed to us. At this time there is a voluntary scheme. Present figures show that 5,800 builders have joined, representing over 70 per cent. of those who build private houses. This has all been achieved within the last year. We should give it a little more time before talking about Government intervention.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that although the figure of 70 per cent. of new houses being built by members of the N.H.B.R.C. is undoubtedly correct, a considerably smaller proportion than 70 per cent. of individual builders are members of this Council, and that further action is necessary to encourage membership?

The hon. Member is on a very important point, on the question of those builders who are outside the scheme. At some stage the House may have to consider what to do in order to achieve 100 per cent. membership.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether, in view of the progress now made by rent officers in fixing fair rents, he will exercise his powers under the Rent Act, 1965, to bring into regulation under that Act all tenancies at present controlled.

My right hon. Friend has no such proposals at present.

Does the hon. Gentleman recall that when the present Lord President of the Council took these powers he gave an undertaking that they would be exercised as soon as the initial rush of applications under the Rent Act had been dealt with? In view of the progress that has now been made with these applications, does the Minister's Answer means that the Government intend to welsh on this pledge?

My right hon. Friend is keeping an eye on the progress made under the Rent Act. As Answers to previous Questions today have shown, many more tenants ought to go for protection to the rent officers. We hope that they will.

Will my hon. Friend note the anxiety of hon. and right hon. Members opposite to increase rents at every possible opportunity?

Is it not a fact that many rent officers have not sufficient work to do under the present Act and could easily take on this new duty? Would that not make it possible for many landlords of controlled properties, where rents are too low, to carry out repairs and keep their properties in a proper condition?

My right hon. Friend keeps under continuous review the work loads on rent officers and makes necessary adjustments as the need arises.

What is the explanation for the failure of tenants to ask rent officers to assist them in regulating the rents of their properties? Ought not the Government to undertake an investigation of this matter in order to discover why the rate of progress has been so slow?

My right hon. Friend is keeping a close eye on the recent statistics and is considering their implications. The main explanation is probably still fear of eviction. In spite of the protection of the Rent Act, too many tenants still think that they will be evicted if they go to their rent officers.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many houses and flats respectively are held under controlled tenancies in London and in the rest of the country; and what in each case is the average rent.

Precise figures are not available; but I estimate that in Greater London there are about 200,000 controlled tenancies of houses and about 100,000 of flats; in the rest of England and Wales about 1·1 million of houses and about 50,000 of flats. The estimated median annual rent is £66 in Greater London and £38 in the rest of England and Wales.

In view of the fact that the hon. Member himself said a moment ago that he wished more tenants would come forward and use the services of their rent officers, have not rent officers now the ability to deal with cases of this size and number? Is it not now clear that it is political cowardice rather than administrative difficulty which prevents his right hon. Friend taking the action which the Lord President of the Council pledged himself to take?

In Greater London—to which area the right hon. Gentleman referred—in many places there is still a heavy backlog of cases.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the reason why tenants will not go to their rent officers is that in their experience, in the majority of cases—certainly in my constituency—the consequence is to put the rents up?

Order. That supplementary is really on a previous question.

Does the pledge still stand? If so, when does the hon. Member hope to implement it?

All the pledges of the Labour Party stand.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that the level of rents which can be charged for properties coming within the scope of the Rent Acts makes it impossible in many cases for property owners to keep their properties in reasonable repair; and what action he is proposing to take to prevent such properties degenerating into slums.

My right hon. Friend is aware of the many problems surrounding the condition of the older parts of the housing stock. I would also refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Gardner) on 13th June.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that Answer gets us nowhere? Would he listen much more sympathetically to the plea that controlled rents should now be brought within the scope of the 1965 Act, so that fair rents can be fixed and properties can be kept in order?

I have already dealt with the questions of controlled rents. Raising rent does not, by itself, get property into repair.

Will my hon. Friend recognise that many statutory tenants in London are prepared to arrest the degeneration of their houses by buying them and doing the necessary improvements, and the fact that the money lent by local authorities is only half what it was two years ago is preventing tenants being able to do this?

My right hon. Friend is answering a Question on the second part of that supplementary question later.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce legislation to enable local authorities to set up agencies for the exchange and sale of private houses.

My right hon. Friend is at present reviewing the experimental arrangements made last year by seven local authorities, in consultation with the Department for maintaining local registers of houses for sale. I think it would be better to see how far these arrangements could be developed rather than to seek powers for local authorities to act as agents.

Does not my hon. Friend think that as a result of this experiment such a central agency for local authorities could provide a useful service? Is it not about time that there was some competition in this business?

Seven authorities were concerned on this experiment—Salford, Enfield, Wolverhampton, Reading, Southampton, Leicester, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne. We have had a meeting with the town clerks concerned and a full report is being prepared on the activities of the last few months. Only two of these authorities have been going for a year. Let us get some real information before making any decision.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will take steps to bring standards of privately-built houses into line with those applying to local authority and co-ownership housing.

The best way of securing progressive improvement in the standards of private houses is by encouraging builders to register with the National House Builders' Registration Council. With the Government's support, the Council have greatly increased the number of registered builders and is raising the standards to which its members must conform. I think we should see how these arrangements develop before considering the need for more direct intervention by the Government.

Would my right hon. Friend not accept that that does not indicate that these houses were built to Parker Morris standards? As we intend to build 500,000 houses a year within the next few years, this means that half of them will be subject to Parker Morris standards and the half built for private ownership will not, and there is a great danger that the slums of the future will be those houses built for private ownership and purchased at considerable expense?

I am interested in what my hon. Friend says. Many Parker Morris standards have been included in the new specifications of the National House Builders Registration Council, and we must all try to maintain a balance between the need to raise standards and the need to meet the requirements of house purchasers within costs which they can afford.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will advise local authorities to seek discussions with the insurance companies with a view to securing reductions in the premiums payable on fire insurance policies for houses owned by them where the electrical wiring systems in the houses concerned conform to the appropriate safety standards.

This is a matter for the local authority associations. My right hon. Friend has no reason to think that they need further advice on the subject at this time, but I have no doubt that they will take note of the question.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the number of fires caused by faulty electrical installations? Would it not be a good thing to encourage insurance companies to offer this kind of incentive both to local authorities and householders in order to ensure proper and safe installations, especially in new houses?

My hon. Friend's Question related only to local authorities. The advice that I have received is that local authorities do a first-class job of work in the houses under their control. As far as I know, they already enjoy reduced rates of insurance.

Is the hon. Member aware that what is really wrong is that the appropriate standards referred to in the Question have hardly been amended since 1937, and that what is required is a total revision of all electrical wiring standards for houses to bring them up to contemporary standards of good quality and excellence?

That may be so—

It is so.

It does not follow that because the hon. Member expresses a view he is right, as we know only too well. I give an undertaking on behalf of my right hon. Friend that we shall discuss this matter with local authority associations and see what their evidence is on this very important matter.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement on the results of his most recent discussions with the building societies on the question of lowering their lending rates of interest to private house buyers in view of the several reductions in the bank rate.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what further discussions he has had with building societies with a view to reducing interest rates on home mortgage loans.

I have had no recent discussions with the building societies on this subject. They are, of course, aware that the Government would wish them to reduce the rates charged to borrowers as soon as they find it practicable to do so consistent with the need to attract and retain funds adequate to sustain a rising private housing programme.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I find that reply very disappointing? Is he further aware that land, I presume, other hon. Members—have had letters from irate constituents drawing attention to the alacrity with which building societies increase their rates of interest when the Bank Rate rises but do not do the reverse when the Bank Rate goes down?

In fairness to the building societies, my hon. Friend should appreciate that their rates are determined by what they have to pay for the money which they borrow to lend to other people, and it is necessary to maintain that flow of supplies at present.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that people are not impressed by academic arguments about the supply and demand of money? When will they get the low interest rates which they were promised?

I do not regard the flow of money as an academic consideration. As my hon. Friend is well aware, most mortgage payers are covered by Income Tax relief and others will be helped by the option mortgage scheme, which will substantially reduce the rate of interest paid.

Mr. Lubbock, whose family anxieties are happily over. And we are very glad.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Although we would like a reduction, would not the effect be that many people who wanted to borrow money during the rest of the year were barred because the funds were not available?

I would add my congratulations to the hon. Gentleman.

Yes, that would be the effect. Funds are flowing into the building societies satisfactorily and, as a result, their commitments are extremely promising. They were £81 million in October and rose to £146 million in May, which is very satisfactory.

Further to the supplementary question by one of the Minister's hon. Friends about election pledges, when will the mortgage rate be reduced to the Foreign Secretary's 3 per cent., or even 4 per cent.? Does this Labour election pledge still stand on its head?

That is a very hoary one, even for the right hon. Gentleman, but perhaps he will study the debates on the option mortgages Bill.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce amending legislation in order to ensure that caravan dwellers are not liable for payment of back rates which the site owner has already paid.

No, Sir. Where caravanners become subject to individual assessment and thereby liable for rate-arrears, the site-operator normally becomes eligible for a rate-refund in respect of the same period, so no double rate-payment will in the end have been made.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the monstrous injustice at Sleepe, near Wareham, where, due to a sudden decision to rate sites individually, constituents are being asked for enormous retrospective sums, which they do not possess and cannot pay which have already been paid by the landlord on whom there is no certain legal obligation to reimburse?

That is a decision not of my right hon. Friend but of the courts.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what advice he proposes to give local authorities about the proportion of one-, two-, three- and four-bedroomed houses they construct to meet the needs of families on their waiting lists.

Local authorities are well acquainted with the circumstances and needs of their areas and are best placed to take decisions about the proportion of new houses of different sizes which they should build. The Central Housing Advisory Committee is considering whether there are any general lessons to be drawn from the local authorities' experience.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that there is need for local authorities to be more explicit and more consistent as to their criteria? Is not the composition of the nation's housing stock too important to be left solely to those whose judgments are often based on short-term financial considerations?

The problem here is whether Whitehall is competent to tell local authorities what the need is in their own local areas. The answer is that it would be quite impossible for Whitehall or any central authority to say whether a local authority needed one-, two-, or three-bedroomed houses. They ought at least to know that.

Is not that reply a little complacent? Would it not assist local authorities to have a thorough investigation into this point and then advise them? Is it not true that in many areas the single-bedroomed dwellings are far too few to cope with the elderly people wanting dwellings and, at the other end of the scale, four bedrooms are not sufficient to cope with the large families? Does not this position need a thorough investigation and advice to local authorities?

The figures we have show that single-bedroomed dwellings account for more than a quarter of the new houses built, while one-bedroomed and two-bedroomed dwellings account for 60 per cent. We do not deny that there are some local authorities where the assessments may be very bad, but one does not indict other local authorities because one among them is not very good.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will issue a circular to local authorities to meet their housing density requirements on the basis of low-rise, rather than high-rise development.

Circular No. 36/67, issued on 25th April, asked local authorities and local planning authorities to reappraise their policies for housing densities and layouts where these appear to demand a high proportion of high-rise dwellings. The Circular also required special justification for housing subsidies at net densities above 165 bedspaces to the acre in conurbations and 120 bed-spaces per acre elsewhere.

Does my hon. Friend consider that his reply goes far enough? Are not there serious psychological problems faced by mothers with large families and small children in high blocks? Is it not time to reflect people's requirements and wishes instead of architectural follies?

If my hon. Friend will read the debates in Committee on the Housing Subsidies Bill he will see that the whole argument about high blocks was then raised. These high blocks are essential in our great towns and cities to deal with the enormous populations, but the Minister has already made it clear, from the form of subsidies we have introduced, that we shall not give subsidies for what we call the prestige blocks.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will issue a circular advising local authorities to purchase property required for development purposes as soon as the proposals are decided so as to prevent hardship to owners possessing blighted properties.

A circular to this effect was issued in 1959. So far as I am aware, local authorities are operating it.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that considerable hardship is still being caused to owners of blighted property, and that the special hardship arrangements apply almost solely to owner occupiers? Would he not remove this anomaly by placing blighted property in the same category when dealing with hardship cases?

The circular allows for discretion. If the hon. Gentleman feels that there are cases in which it is not being effectively applied, perhaps he will draw the attention of the local authority to this circular.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with circulars in this matter? Would he not consider whether the legislation itself needs amendment in order to provide for those who do not come within the narrow limit of blighted property as defined by the Act at present?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, I am not unaware of his concern. I am giving the matter my attention.

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has for a further meeting with Mr. Kosygin.

I have as yet no further information to give the House about my next meeting with Mr. Kosygin.

Has the Prime Minister noted that at the United Nations yesterday Mr. Kosygin said that Israel must return to her 1949 borders? Would he remind Mr. Kosygin that Russia captured part of Finland, all of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and East Prussia and a large part of Poland, and held them all after 1945 on the ground that they were essential to her security? Is not the security of Israel also important?

This is interesting, but we cannot have speeches at Question Time. The Prime Minister.

The position of Her Majesty's Government was stated by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary in a speech in the country on Saturday, which will be made available to the House. And, of course, my right hon. Friend will be expressing further the position of Her Majesty's Government on this and other questions when he intervenes in the Assembly debate.

Would it not be advisable at some stage to remind Mr. Kosygin, when he talks of aggression on the part of one nation, about the aggression perpetrated seven years ago by the Soviet Union against Hungary?

I believe that there are very many arguments that could be used in an atmosphere of tit for tat, but I believe that in the present situation —in the present very difficult and grave situation—in the Middle East we must all try to get the debate in the Assembly now, at any rate, on to a more constructive level.

Can the Prime Minister tell the House whether he has yet reached a decision about going to the General Assembly while Mr. Kosygin is there and, if he has, what the reasons for his decision are?

This is a matter which I discussed with the President of France. In the present situation in the Assembly I doubt whether this would be very useful, but I shall be in touch with the President of France and, of course, considering whether at the right moment it might be possible to get high-level talks on a more constructive basis. At the moment, I thought that the tone of the Assembly would suggest that there would be no purpose in it.

After Mr. Kosygin's speech yesterday at the United Nations, does my right hon. Friend think that any useful purpose would be served by having any further conversations with him?

Yes, Sir. [Interruption.] I am afraid that many things are being said in New York, and I fear that many things will be said in New York, that are not likely to lower the temperature in a situation where it is important to lower the temperature, but none of these, in this present overheated atmosphere, are any arguments at all why we should not, at the appropriate moment, have talks with Mr. Kosygin either in the present context or on my visit to the Soviet Union.

Do not some of these supplementary questions suggest that we are having too many summit meetings, which cause people to expect too much too quickly in regard to very difficult problems? Would it not be better to leave the Diplomatic Service to do the job more quietly and expeditiously?

I am not responsible for all the supplementary questions put. I believe that, however difficult the problem and however overheated the situation may be at the moment, nothing but good can come in the long term from frequent meetings with leaders of other countries, provided, as the hon. Member says, that excessive expectations are not raised by each new meeting.

Despite the difficulties we are having at the present moment, will the Prime Minister inform the House whether it is the Government's intention to make every effort towards a four-Power summit conference?

It is still our position that, at the right moment, a four-Power summit meeting or a four-Power meeting at another level would probably be very helpful. We are more likely, I think, to get constructive and imaginative ideas in a high-level sort of meeting—obviously in consultation with the countries affected—than if it were left to the procedure of debate and argument and counter-argument, but I fear that, in the present situation of the Assembly, we are not at this stage yet, and may not be for some little time.

Following the question by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer), would not the Prime Minister tell the House whether President Johnson consulted the Prime Minister before he approached Mr. Kosygin over a summit meeting in New York? Does the Prime Minister therefore share the rebuff administered to President Johnson?

Consultations between the American President and myself are normally confidential except when it is necessary to make a report to the House—for example, on talks I have had over there—but I should have thought it a very natural thing for the Head of Government, indeed Head of State of the host country, to say that he was willing to meet with a distinguished visitor who is a Head of Government. I do not think this matter can be treated in terms of rebuffs and phrases of that kind.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in order to overcome the difficulties for New Zealand should Great Britain sign the Treaty of Rome, he will propose a federation of the United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of New Zealand.

I have no reason to think that the hon. Member's suggestion would be acceptable to the Government and people of New Zealand.

Would the Prime Minister agree that New Zealand is closer to this country in terms of transport than Scotland was to London at the time of the Act of Union, that the economy of New Zealand has been closely geared to that of Great Britain for decades, that New Zealand has served this country magnificently in the past in many fields and that the more that the economy of New Zealand is brought together with that of Europe, the better it will be for all?

I have not done the calculations, but the point about transport is certainly true, and it is probably true of nearly every country in the world. As to the other parts of the supplementary question, the whole House agreed in the recent debate on the Common Market that it is our duty to see that New Zealand's problems are solved in any application. I indicated a large number of possible solutions, but I do not think it right for us to say at this stage which is the right one. My right hon. Friend has been discussing this and I have discussed it with the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand. This particular proposal did not come up. I think we have all agreed that we should leave it to see what is the best way of meeting the legitimate requirements of New Zealand.

The Prime Minister keeps referring, quite rightly, to New Zealand posing a special problem. Is it his objective to maintain the existing volume of trade in butter, cheese and lamb? Is that the objective in the negotiations?

I do not think I should add to what I said in a long, perhaps over-lengthy, speech in the debate on the Common Market. We have had these discussions with New Zealand recently. I think these matters are best left, as I think New Zealand would prefer them to be left, to the negotiations.

asked the Prime Minister what progress has been made in starting negotiations to join the European Economic Community.

I understand that the European Economic Community Council of Ministers is meeting on 26th June to discuss our application for membership of the European Communities. Her Majesty's Government trusts that this will result in a substantive reply to our application.

Does my right hon. Friend think the negotiations are actually likely to start in the near future? Can he give the House details about the length of such negotiations? If it looks as if the negotiations are going to be played around with, will he consider withdrawing the application?

No, I do not think that would be the most helpful way of dealing with the situation, but I am certainly not in a position, even after the last 48 hours, to give a specific and clear reply to the first part of my hon. Friend's question. What I have been able to do in the last 48 hours is to stress the great urgency we feel about this matter, not only for the sake of Britain but of France and Europe.

In view of the apparent difficulties of obtaining admission to the European Economic Community—which most of us want—will the Prime Minister take care to see that E.F.T.A. is not destroyed and we are left with neither the E.E.C. nor E.F.T.A.?

This is a point we have made on a number of occasions about our position in relation to E.F.T.A. There are alternatives which are possible, or could be possible, but the Government feel that this is by far the best solution for us and the rest of Europe, and indeed for the world.

asked the Prime Minister what is the approximate average cost in each of the last three years to the British taxpayer of the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement; and whether he will seek to guarantee the equivalent sum in aid to the signatories of that Agreement who are developing countries.

No cost falls on the Exchequer, Sir. The rest of the Question does not therefore arise.

As consumers in this country are nearly all taxpayers, will the Prime Minister agree that the average expenditure on the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement in this country is of the order of £60 million a year and that the more the economies of developing countries are diversified the better it will be? If it is possible, would it not be better for Europe to consume more cane sugar and less beet sugar?

The hon. Member is right, of course, that the way in which this Agreement is honoured is by the consumer in effect paying for it under the equalisation arrangements. Certainly the figures of the order of those quoted by the hon. Member represent the kind of contribution we are making. Compensation would not solve the problem of finding work for those currently engaged in the sugar plantations and sugar processing industries, but, as the hon. Member knows, my right hon. Friend is this week presiding, over a conference of representatives of sugar-producing members of the Commonwealth.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that without the Agreement islands with a monoculture economy, particularly Mauritius and Barbados, would suffer almost certain economic death without some help? Will he bear this constantly in mind during the negotiations?

My hon. Friend is right that, whereas we are concerned about the Commonwealth position as a whole, islands and other areas with a monocultural economy would be particularly hard hit. It is this problem my right hon. Friend is seeking to deal with in his discussions with representatives of the Commonwealth sugar producers.

asked the Prime Minister if he will instruct the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, the Secretary of State for Defence and the Minister of Labour to assess the nation's need for manpower and to consider whether selective releases of members of the Armed Forces returning from abroad be in the national interest.

Regular assessments are already made both of the overall manpower needs of the nation and of the specific needs of the Armed Forces.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some experts believe that the present numbers of men in the Armed Forces may be excessive for highly-mechanised forces apart from the reduced need for men in the Forces? Will he, therefore, reconsider his Answer and make it possible to give more purposive employment to a number of men in the national interest?

I think my hon. Friend will agree that it would be right for the House to wait, and for my hon. Friend to wait, until we are in a position to make a full statement on the results of our defence considerations which are going on at present. Obviously, manpower must be one of the questions raised in such a survey.

Will the Prime Minister tell us what is to happen to our economy in Great Britain if we are no longer able with a population of 52 million to employ 400,000 in our Armed Forces and to pay and equip them?

This raises wide questions about defence policy. I am sure the hon. Member, who has great knowledge of defence questions from his service in Departments concerned with these matters, will want to wait until we make a statement about defence when he could raise that question again.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now appoint a further Minister with responsibility for disarmament.

The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley), has assumed this responsibility.

Is there any difference in the disarmament field between the appointment of Lord Chalfont in 1964 and the new appointment of the Minister of State, the right hon. Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley).

My noble Friend, who has worked assiduously on the disarmament problem — [Laughter.] — I should have thought hon. Members who laugh would feel that after last Saturday there are few more important matters in the world. We have now reached a situation where, at Geneva, the prospects of disarmament, despite all the difficulties, have been brought to a new state of hopefulness. A great deal of the credit for this is due to my noble Friend and the Minister of State will carry on from where he left off.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his visit to the President of France.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his visit to General de Gaulle.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his recent talks with General de Gaulle.

With permission, I will answer Questions Q8, Q9 and Q11 at the end of Question Time.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about his discussions with other heads of Governments on the situation in the Middle East.